Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2012 Jun;27(6):716-29.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1938-8. Epub 2011 Dec 7.

Updated report on comparative effectiveness of ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and direct renin inhibitors for patients with essential hypertension: much more data, little new information

Benjamin J Powers  1 , Remy R Coeytaux, Rowena J Dolor, Vic Hasselblad, Uptal D Patel, William S Yancy Jr, Rebecca N Gray, R Julian Irvine, Amy S Kendrick, Gillian D Sanders
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Updated report on comparative effectiveness of ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and direct renin inhibitors for patients with essential hypertension: much more data, little new information

Benjamin J Powers et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jun.

Abstract

Objectives: A 2007 systematic review compared angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with hypertension. Direct renin inhibitors (DRIs) have since been introduced, and significant new research has been published. We sought to update and expand the 2007 review.

Data sources: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (through December 2010) and selected other sources for relevant English-language trials.

Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: We included studies that directly compared ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and/or DRIs in at least 20 total adults with essential hypertension; had at least 12 weeks of follow-up; and reported at least one outcome of interest. Ninety-seven (97) studies (36 new since 2007) directly comparing ACE inhibitors versus ARBs and three studies directly comparing DRIs to ACE inhibitor inhibitors or ARBs were included.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods: A standard protocol was used to extract data on study design, interventions, population characteristics, and outcomes; evaluate study quality; and summarize the evidence.

Results: In spite of substantial new evidence, none of the conclusions from the 2007 review changed. The level of evidence remains high for equivalence between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for blood pressure lowering and use as single antihypertensive agents, as well as for superiority of ARBs for short-term adverse events (primarily cough). However, the new evidence was insufficient on long-term cardiovascular outcomes, quality of life, progression of renal disease, medication adherence or persistence, rates of angioedema, and differences in key patient subgroups.

Limitations: Included studies were limited by follow-up duration, protocol heterogeneity, and infrequent reporting on patient subgroups.

Conclusions and implications of key findings: Evidence does not support a meaningful difference between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for any outcome except medication side effects. Few, if any, of the questions that were not answered in the 2007 report have been addressed by the 36 new studies. Future research in this area should consider areas of uncertainty and be prioritized accordingly.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Study flow diagram.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Random-effects meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating successful blood pressure control on monotherapy. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs); RCT = randomized controlled trial.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Random-effects meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating cough as an adverse event. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs); RCT = randomized controlled trial.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Random-effects meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating withdrawals due to adverse events. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs); RCT = randomized controlled trial.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Collins R, Peto R, MacMahon S, et al. Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 2, Short-term reductions in blood pressure: overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context. Lancet. 1990;335(8693):827–838. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(90)90944-Z. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, et al. Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies.[Erratum appears in Lancet. 2003 Mar 22;361(9362):1060] Lancet. 2002;360(9349):1903–1913. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11911-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Casas JP, Chua W, Loukogeorgakis S, et al. Effect of inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system and other antihypertensive drugs on renal outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005;366(9502):2026–2033. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67814-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Matchar DB, McCrory DC, Orlando LA, et al. Comparative Effectiveneness of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs) and Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists (ARBs) for Treating Essential Hypertension. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 10. (Prepared by Duke Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0025.) Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. November 2007. Available at: www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm. Accessed October 31, 2010. - PubMed
    1. Matchar DB, McCrory DC, Orlando LA, et al. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers for treating essential hypertension. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(1):16–29. - PubMed

MeSH terms